Spottiswood v Combis

In *Spottiswood v Combis*, the Supreme Court of Victoria was asked to determine a dispute between a vendor and a purchaser concerning the sale of a property. The purchaser sought to terminate the contract of sale, alleging that the vendor had breached a condition precedent. The vendor, in turn, sought to enforce the contract and claim damages for the alleged breach by the purchaser.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the vendor had fulfilled a condition precedent to the contract, specifically the obtaining of a satisfactory building permit. The Court was required to interpret the terms of the contract and assess whether the actions taken by the vendor constituted a genuine and diligent attempt to satisfy this condition, or if their conduct amounted to a breach of their contractual obligations.

Justice Burnett found that the vendor had not taken all reasonable steps to obtain the building permit. The Court reasoned that the condition precedent was a material term of the contract, and the vendor's failure to diligently pursue the permit meant they had not satisfied their obligations. Consequently, the purchaser was entitled to terminate the contract. The Court ordered that the contract be terminated and that the vendor pay the purchaser's costs.